Thursday, March 05, 2009

Civics lesson, my butt.

The Oyster, (bless his heart) was over at his blog, talking about Joseph Cao, the new US Representative from Louisiana's 2nd District. He and I like Cao, although for probably different reasons. Anyway, the Oyster was talking about Cao's vote on the stimulus bill and quoted a Huffpo article where Cao was having some lighthearted banter with members of the press.

He then added that party shouldn't define a member of Congress and that "we are basically servants of the citizens of the United States."

In comments, I objected to the "basically" remark and said.

No, Congressmen are actually public servants. They are in public service. Their entire function in life is to serve the people in their district.

They should be reminded of this fact regularly by their constituents.

The Oyster made a comment on my little blog and said that he had to give me a civics lesson in a post update. So, I went back to his post, where I found this little nugget.

In the comments Paw Paw claims that "the entire function" of U.S. Reps "is to serve the people in their district."

Not so. U.S. Reps swear to support and defend the Constitution, they do not swear to only serve the people of their district.

Well, Oyster, you're right about the oath. Public officers of the United States take an oath of office. They all basically say the same thing with minor variations, but in the case of a US Representative, the oath is as follows:

"I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

This is generally the same oath that all public officers of the United States take. I've taken it four times. As a young, brash lieutenant of our Army I first took it upon assuming the privileges of an officer. I understood then and I understand now that the oath was to the Constitution. My primary function, however, was to my soldiers and the officers appointed over me.

Cao's duties as a public officer vary, but the entire function of his job is to represent the people who sent him to Congress. It's that old "representative republic" thing. His job is to represent the people of Louisiana's second district while supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States.

Then, we should go to Article 1 of the US Constitution, which sets forth the basic functions of the US House of Representatives. There, we learn that among other things, the House is elected from the people and is expected, among other things, to:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States

So, keeping in mind that Cao is supposed to represent the people, while honoring his oath to the Constitution, I would argue that his NO vote on the stimulus was completely in keeping with his duties and consistent with his oath of office.

This stimulus package has created the greatest destruction of personal wealth in the United States in this century. It threatens to burden us with massive debt for many years to come. It is neither an investment, nor is it helping with the recovery. It's a huge spending bill. I would submit that a vote FOR the stimulus was directly in violation of the Constitution to "provide for the general welfare of the United States". Creating the conditions for the destruction of untold wealth in the form of pensions, 401K's, stock portfolios and annuities is not providing for the general welfare of the United States. Some would argue that it hinders the general welfare.

Congress was wrong when they passed that bill. Our President was wrong when he signed it. As bad as the stimulus is, the budget is even worse.

Still, I like Cao. I think that he's going to do fine in Congress. As long as he keeps his job firmly in his head, and keeps his sense of humor about him.

1 comment:

"Cao's duties as a public officer vary, but the entire function of his job is to represent the people who sent him to Congress... His job is to represent the people of Louisiana's second district while supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States."

The first statement is not necessarily equal to the second statement. This is perhaps technical or semantical. If you change the word "entirely" to "primarily" I wouldn't have a quibble.

As far as the stimulus bill being the "the greatest destruction of personal wealth in the United States in this century" that has yet to be seen. So far the greatest destruction of personal wealth this century has been the collapse in real estate and stock market values over the past 2 years or so. That has already occurred.

About Me

I'm a grandpaw who has lived a life of adventure, and resent having to slow down. I've been a Tank Commander, a Company Commander, an MP. My main career has been law enforcement, with 30 years and counting. At this stage of my life, the most important people in my life call me PawPaw. You've come to PawPaw's House. Sit back and enjoy.
Email me at ddezendorf at yahoo dot com (all spambots must die)